Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 159 (8146 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-01-2014 7:47 AM
56 online now:
Phat (AdminPhat), Tangle (2 members, 54 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: prof premraj pushpakaran
Post Volume:
Total: 739,107 Year: 24,948/28,606 Month: 5/2,244 Week: 464/647 Day: 5/64 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
4849
50
5152
...
72NextFF
Author Topic:   Why are there no human apes alive today?
hooah212002
Member
Posts: 3179
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 736 of 1075 (623269)
07-09-2011 1:59 AM
Reply to: Message 735 by LucyTheApe
07-09-2011 1:38 AM


Re: Apes have ventured into space and animals that have built automatons.
"a cosmic Jewish zombie screwed his own teenager virgin mother so he could get her pregnant with himself. He did this so he could sacrifice himself to himself in order to save the world from himself because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake with legs to eat fruit from a magical tree"

No, THAT's ridiculous.


"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square
This message is a reply to:
 Message 735 by LucyTheApe, posted 07-09-2011 1:38 AM LucyTheApe has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 739 by LucyTheApe, posted 07-09-2011 2:31 AM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 786 days)
Posts: 2962
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 737 of 1075 (623273)
07-09-2011 2:24 AM
Reply to: Message 732 by Mazzy
07-08-2011 4:35 PM


Re: Morphometrics
I am entitled to my views and interpretation

Yup. But when you post them, we're entitled to point out that you don't have the first clue what you are talking about.

Now, back to the issue at hand...

You claim that non-white Australians aren't human.

Care to back that up?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 732 by Mazzy, posted 07-08-2011 4:35 PM Mazzy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 746 by Mazzy, posted 07-09-2011 4:23 AM Nuggin has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 12881
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 738 of 1075 (623274)
07-09-2011 2:28 AM
Reply to: Message 735 by LucyTheApe
07-09-2011 1:38 AM


Re: Apes have ventured into space and animals that have built automatons.
They still haven't shown how an ape developed the ability to do mathematics; they can't. They also wont be able to show how apes developed to ability to percieve reality and determine their destiny.

Evolution, of course.

They'll create them out of their imagination, something that they have no answer for in their evolutionary paradigm.

Actually, we dig them out of the ground.

It's difficult to understand that intelligent humans can hold such a ridiculous belief.

That depends who you are. It is easy for intelligent humans to understand why intelligent humans hold such a belief. From the outside, I concede that you must find it puzzling; like a dog trying to understand the thoughts of even the dullest of human beings. Perhaps you had better resign yourself to the idea that the reasoning of intelligent humans will be forever beyond your grasp.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 735 by LucyTheApe, posted 07-09-2011 1:38 AM LucyTheApe has not yet responded

LucyTheApe
Inactive Member


Message 739 of 1075 (623275)
07-09-2011 2:31 AM
Reply to: Message 736 by hooah212002
07-09-2011 1:59 AM


Re: Apes have ventured into space and animals that have built automatons.
hooha the descenter writes:

a cosmic Jewish zombie screwed his own teenager virgin mother so he could get her pregnant with himself. He did this so he could sacrifice himself to himself in order to save the world from himself because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake with legs to eat fruit from a magical tree

The Angel Gabriel approached Mary, our Mother and Eternal Virgin, and asked her if she would consent to be overcome by the Holy Spirit to inpregnate her; She agreed. God then became flesh. Sin requires blood. He shed his blood for our sins.

Did Adam walk out of the garden proud. I don't think so, he left a broken man doomed to die, he realised what he had done and so did Eve.


There no doubt exist natural laws, but once this fine reason of ours was corrupted, it corrupted everything.

blɛz paskal


This message is a reply to:
 Message 736 by hooah212002, posted 07-09-2011 1:59 AM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 745 by Nuggin, posted 07-09-2011 4:02 AM LucyTheApe has not yet responded

Portillo
Member (Idle past 635 days)
Posts: 258
Joined: 11-14-2010


Message 740 of 1075 (623279)
07-09-2011 3:40 AM
Reply to: Message 642 by Nuggin
07-06-2011 3:54 AM


quote:
Tell us, after 2000 years, what evidence do you have of an actual Jesus? Got "a handful of undisputed Jesus fossils"?

I'll match you 1,000 to 1 for each and every piece of physical evidence you provide. How's that sound?


The fact that you dispute the existence of Jesus shows your bias. How many other historical not mythological people do you deny existed? I bet you dont deny that Buddha or Muhammad existed.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 642 by Nuggin, posted 07-06-2011 3:54 AM Nuggin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 743 by Nuggin, posted 07-09-2011 3:57 AM Portillo has responded

Portillo
Member (Idle past 635 days)
Posts: 258
Joined: 11-14-2010


Message 741 of 1075 (623280)
07-09-2011 3:45 AM
Reply to: Message 638 by MikeDeich
07-05-2011 8:37 PM


Re: More evolved?
quote:
Portillo....You should consider that human language is largely responsible for the complexity we see with our current society. That is our passing on of ideas has in effect accumulated over the generations to create the amazing architecture, art, space travel, etc....that you say makes us so different from apes.

Hard to believe that language is all it takes to build a rocketship etc. Are you saying that if another animal evolves language that they will also be able to build a rocketship?

quote:
And even language itself is only formed through the environment we have created for ourselves as well.....cases of neglected and feral children have shown language can not be learned after a certain age.

I dont know about that. I heard that feral children can create their own language, expecially if they have other kids to socialise with. Some scientists say that human language is inborn/innate.

Edited by Portillo, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 638 by MikeDeich, posted 07-05-2011 8:37 PM MikeDeich has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 795 by MikeDeich, posted 07-10-2011 8:14 PM Portillo has not yet responded

Portillo
Member (Idle past 635 days)
Posts: 258
Joined: 11-14-2010


Message 742 of 1075 (623282)
07-09-2011 3:48 AM
Reply to: Message 626 by frako
07-04-2011 3:30 AM


quote:
There are about 100 homo erectus remains and thats just one branch of the homo family and its not a number i would consider a handful.

Some scientists have said that homo erectus is fully human. If that is true, then you have 100 human fossils no different then any other human. Hardly a missing link or key to human evolution from apes.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 626 by frako, posted 07-04-2011 3:30 AM frako has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 744 by Nuggin, posted 07-09-2011 3:59 AM Portillo has not yet responded

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 786 days)
Posts: 2962
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 743 of 1075 (623283)
07-09-2011 3:57 AM
Reply to: Message 740 by Portillo
07-09-2011 3:40 AM


The fact that you dispute the existence of Jesus shows your bias. How many other historical not mythological people do you deny existed? I bet you dont deny that Buddha or Muhammad existed.

So, your argument is that if Person A exists, then person B must exist?

That's pretty weak sauce.

There's no actual evidence for Jesus having existed. The _closest_ thing you've got is a known forgery of a historical record. Hardly evidence.

Is it possible or even likely that there was a person in that general area at that general time who had that name? Sure. There's at least 2 guys named Jesus on my street!

But the STORY spun in the Bible is not the story of a living breathing person.

It's a collection of features from EARLIER religions which the Jews/Early Christians co-opted.

This CAN'T be news to you.

Can you tell me how "Jesus" differs significantly from Horace or Mithra or any of the other solar deities of the area?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 740 by Portillo, posted 07-09-2011 3:40 AM Portillo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 748 by Portillo, posted 07-09-2011 5:27 AM Nuggin has responded

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 786 days)
Posts: 2962
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 744 of 1075 (623284)
07-09-2011 3:59 AM
Reply to: Message 742 by Portillo
07-09-2011 3:48 AM


Some guys say...
Some scientists have said that homo erectus is fully human.

Oh, hey, we're playing the "some guys say" game.

I'm AWESOME at this game.

Some Christians say that Jesus was a pedophile.
Some Christians say that Jesus was actually a goat.
Some Christians say that all Christians are made of chocolate.

It's AMAZING all the things that "Some guys say" when you don't have to actually back up the claims.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 742 by Portillo, posted 07-09-2011 3:48 AM Portillo has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 747 by Mazzy, posted 07-09-2011 5:08 AM Nuggin has responded

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 786 days)
Posts: 2962
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 745 of 1075 (623285)
07-09-2011 4:02 AM
Reply to: Message 739 by LucyTheApe
07-09-2011 2:31 AM


Re: Apes have ventured into space and animals that have built automatons.
The Angel Gabriel approached Mary, our Mother and Eternal Virgin

And by "eternal virgin" you mean, the girl who became a virgin when the translators realized there was only one word in the Ancient Greek that meant both "young girl" and "girl who hadn't had sex".

Funny how retroactive those sort of changes can be.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 739 by LucyTheApe, posted 07-09-2011 2:31 AM LucyTheApe has not yet responded

  
Mazzy 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1065 days)
Posts: 212
From: Rural NSW, Australia
Joined: 06-09-2011


Message 746 of 1075 (623286)
07-09-2011 4:23 AM
Reply to: Message 737 by Nuggin
07-09-2011 2:24 AM


Re: Morphometrics
You claim that non-white Australians aren't human.

Care to back that up?

Nuggin....After you clarify what on earth you are talking about.

Once again I see you dilly with asides. This is great as it demonstrates you are unable to mount any refute..again.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 737 by Nuggin, posted 07-09-2011 2:24 AM Nuggin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 754 by Nuggin, posted 07-09-2011 11:58 AM Mazzy has not yet responded

  
Mazzy 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1065 days)
Posts: 212
From: Rural NSW, Australia
Joined: 06-09-2011


Message 747 of 1075 (623288)
07-09-2011 5:08 AM
Reply to: Message 744 by Nuggin
07-09-2011 3:59 AM


Re: Some guys say...
Oh, hey, we're playing the "some guys say" game.

I'm AWESOME at this game.

Some Christians say that Jesus was a pedophile.
Some Christians say that Jesus was actually a goat.
Some Christians say that all Christians are made of chocolate.

It's AMAZING all the things that "Some guys say" when you don't have to actually back up the claims.

I have a plenty... go back and look for yourself.

As I stated previously your continual ignorance of my argument and inability to refute my assertions is becoming more and more obvious.

So this time you chose to nit pick on my pointing out my assertion that Turkana Boy is an ape is not generally accepted by many creationists. Rather that refute the body or points to my argument you chose this to be your big come back and rant about that.

I will not reply to you anymore if you are unable to mount at least some reasonable reply.

If your Erectus are all just flat faced apes that resemble Lluc the obvious ape with a flat face then effectively you have no half human- apes or part human apes or quarter apes or any ape becoming human, nor intermediate beween any common ancestor and anything. Effectivly, you have found apes and humans. This is why there are no intermediates with us today.

I am telling you that your Australepthicenes are apes like Lluc. I have provided the link to the research re Lluc. It demonstrates a facial morphology tha could well be in line with Australopithecus. I have provided EVIDENCE of an ape that dates back 12my to support my assertion.

Turkana Boy is not an African human or part human or near human. Turkana Boy is an African ape that is not and never was on its' way to humanity and likely looks similar to Anoiapithecus brevirostris..

Turkana Boy is an ape. There is a side view of it in the link below.

KNM-WT 15000 (Turkana Boy)
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/15000.html

In the link below is Lluc the FLAT FACED APE....

http://www.sciencedaily.com/...ases/2009/06/090602083729.htm

Now I am telling you that my hypothesis and interpretation of the data at hand is that all these so called Homo erectus such as Turkana Boy were a variation of ape. These did not look human at all but rather resembled the flat faced Lluc, that is obviously still an ape, just an ape and not in any way becoming human.

Now rather than waste my time with fruitlessness why do you not refute one of my major points with a little more intelligence that just offering a belligerant attitute.

Go back and read what I had to say and stay on track, otherwise we are done!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 744 by Nuggin, posted 07-09-2011 3:59 AM Nuggin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 749 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-09-2011 5:47 AM Mazzy has not yet responded
 Message 751 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-09-2011 6:41 AM Mazzy has responded
 Message 755 by Nuggin, posted 07-09-2011 12:01 PM Mazzy has not yet responded

  
Portillo
Member (Idle past 635 days)
Posts: 258
Joined: 11-14-2010


Message 748 of 1075 (623289)
07-09-2011 5:27 AM
Reply to: Message 743 by Nuggin
07-09-2011 3:57 AM


quote:
So, your argument is that if Person A exists, then person B must exist?

That's pretty weak sauce.

There's no actual evidence for Jesus having existed. The _closest_ thing you've got is a known forgery of a historical record. Hardly evidence.

Is it possible or even likely that there was a person in that general area at that general time who had that name? Sure. There's at least 2 guys named Jesus on my street!

But the STORY spun in the Bible is not the story of a living breathing person.

It's a collection of features from EARLIER religions which the Jews/Early Christians co-opted.

This CAN'T be news to you.

Can you tell me how "Jesus" differs significantly from Horace or Mithra or any of the other solar deities of the area?


Do you believe that Buddha, Muhammad and Confucius existed?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 743 by Nuggin, posted 07-09-2011 3:57 AM Nuggin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 756 by Nuggin, posted 07-09-2011 12:03 PM Portillo has not yet responded
 Message 759 by Theodoric, posted 07-09-2011 1:49 PM Portillo has responded

Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 12881
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 2.2


(4)
Message 749 of 1075 (623290)
07-09-2011 5:47 AM
Reply to: Message 747 by Mazzy
07-09-2011 5:08 AM


Turkana Boy
So this time you chose to nit pick on my pointing out my assertion that Turkana Boy is an ape is not generally accepted by many creationists.

These other creationists include you, a fortnight ago, when you wrote:

Turkana Boy is human, the others, especially the one on display at the museum in Michagan, are apes. I am remiss in my ability to understand how such intelligent scientists cannot see the difference. The skulls are clearly ape and human.

And again:

However if they would have pictured Turkana Boy he is fully human.

And again:

I am saying Turkana Boy is fully human. [...] Yet the bottom line is Turkana Boy is human.

And again:

Turkana boy, however is human

And again:

Really most of your Homo Erectus fossils are nothing more than a variety of gorilla, with a human thrown in here and there eg Turkana boy and possibly the little skull cap from Java man. These are just like those of an Australian Aboriginal and well within the variation of human skulls today that vary greatly.

But today you write:

Now I am telling you that my hypothesis and interpretation of the data at hand is that all these so called Homo erectus such as Turkana Boy were a variation of ape. These did not look human at all

So, what happened? Up 'til about a week ago, Turkana Boy was, according to you, "fully human" and "well within the range of human skulls today" and so "clearly" human that you couldn't understand how scientists could deny it. And yet today you write that Turkana Boy "did not look human at all".

What changed? Clearly the fossil stayed the same ... it seems that we have found the perfect intermediate form, in that the same creationist, within the space of a few days, cannot agree with himself on whether it is within the range of modern human skulls or not human at all.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 747 by Mazzy, posted 07-09-2011 5:08 AM Mazzy has not yet responded

Mazzy 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1065 days)
Posts: 212
From: Rural NSW, Australia
Joined: 06-09-2011


Message 750 of 1075 (623293)
07-09-2011 6:26 AM
Reply to: Message 728 by Nuggin
07-08-2011 3:47 PM


Re:
And you make that assertion by proclaiming everything an "ape".

Setting aside your continued inability to grasp the definition of the word "ape", we'll go on the assumption that you actually mean that these previous species are not in the line of descent.

So, your assertion is that species which existed PRIOR to humans are not related to humans no matter how many features they have in common.

I love this belligerance. How dare you say I cannot grasp the defenition of ape. Just because evolutionists see an ape when they look in the mirror does not mean I need to disengage my common sense and see myself as an animal. The classification of mankind as apes is the result of your ridiculous taxonomic system, not baraminology.

What do you mean have in common. Because we were alive. A chimp has a similar skeleton now to humans and looks absolutely nothing like a human. As I said it is brain washing that causes an evolutionist to see an ape in their reflecton. I can contemplate the hereafter, and have superior reasoning and perceptual ability, and best of all I do not have long hair growing all over my body. I know I am not an ape. Too bad for you.

So, you are claiming that Homo Erectus, which walked upright, fashioned and used tools and tended fires is _no relation_ to humans but is instead a special kind of monkey which does things that no other monkey does.

Does this assertion answer questions of morphology? No.
Does this assertion answer questions of DNA? No.
Does this assertion answer questions of ERVs? No.
Does this assertion answer questions about why you can line up the fossils either chronologically OR morphologically and get the same order? No.

Oh no that is not what I said at all. What I have said previously is that the use and control of fire is a complex task. There were no matches. magnifying glass or lighters for erectus. He would have had to have worked out how to use flintstone or stick rubbing, a complex task. I alledge, with its small brain even if I believed it was on its way to humanity, erectus was not smart enough to use and control fire.

What your researchers have found are either fires started naturally, or with hearths, evidence that someone smarter was about at the same time. eg human beings.

As for walking upright there is not better term than to say " What Rubbish". That is flavour of the month. Not too long ago bipedalism was theorised to be connected to brain increase. That has been proven wrong. Neanderthal was also once pictured to be a stooped ape based on its fossils, but now stand perfectly upright. Your reconstructions are biased. Besides chimps can walk upright regardless of being knuckle walkers, it has squat to do with becoming human.

I have given proof that there was flat faced apes around 12mya. Flatter facial features are NOT a sign of becoming human. Erectus has heavy brows, pronaganathism, long arms, large bones, large rounded rib cage. Why I'd say he probably looks just like Lluc.

DNA..I have provided evidence from the Chimpanzee genome project that chimps and humans differ by at least 30%. The simply and obvious thing is that some creature on this earth had to be more similar to us than the rest. It happens to be chimps.

In fact chimps continue to be less and less like us the more they look. The arising of a single cell is in the rubbish bin now. Do not forget with the advent of HGT you now have multiple primitive cells arising. These poofed into existence individually and yet were so genetically similar that they were able to horizonatlly transfer genes. Life on this planet will only ever have the same basic genetic blueprint. It does not show we all came from the same cell. In fact your research now shows we didn't. LUCA is dead and so are your genomic comparisons as HGT has confounded your models into a complexity meltdown.

"Chimpanzees seem almost human, and scientists have maintained for decades that chimps are, in fact, 98.5 percent genetically identical to humans.

But the results of a new study call that figure into question, with a finding that there are actually large chunks of the human and chimp genomes that are vastly different. "
http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/news/2003/03/57892#

The very fact that a figure of 98.5% is proposed in itself suggests the proposterousness of using this as any valid comparison. Truly, evolutionists have been messmerized into believing this is mean to show how alike we are. It is ridiculous. Rather 30%, seem more believable, but also that we are not so much like chimps genomically at all.

ERV's show nothing more than some species were in the same place and were exposed to some bug.

"Within the published human genome sequence, there are over 98,000 human endogenous retroviruses (HERVs), but all are defective, containing nonsense mutations or major deletions. No replication-competent HERVs have been identified to date (26, 31, 33, 35), with only one (K113) with open reading frames for all genes (35), and thus their activity and infectivity is thought to have decreased substantially from levels occurring during earlier periods of primate evolution (1, 23, 34). "
http://jvi.asm.org/cgi/content/full/79/19/12507

Humans can catch Hendra virus but are not closely related to bats or horses. This is just straw grabbing nonsense, made from convoluted mathematical models that mean nothing in the end. You have nonsense mutations and major deletions and it is all guesswork, assumpions and down hill from there.

I understand what you lot assert with the points you put to me. However, one can interpret information more than one way. That is obvious by the way your researchers can disagree on so many things yet still all believe 'it all evolved'.

Morphology only works for you when you want it too. When it doesn't you plead homoplasy, convergent evolution, parallel evolution. The same goes for your genomics.

We are similar to all life because there is only one model for life, RNA's and DNA and it is a wonderful design. It is not about similarity. It is about the differences, gene expression and resulting proteins and gene families.

The genetic comparisons your researchers use are very simplistic. They take a handfull of enzymes, stain them with dyes and use this nonsense as the basis to describe and compare an incredibly complex genomic system. Your reserchers have far to go. The Pergalin research, in my link "you can't make monkeys out of us" is one example of better imaging and showed huge genomic regions that were vastly different between chimp and human. Then the Y chromosome is remarkably different in the male chimp and human.

I have refuted morphology, DNA comparison and ERV's as being any more than theoretical assumptions based on further assumptions and convoluted models and in no way appear to detract from my assertion that there were never any chimp/human intermediates.

Creationists may not have all the answers either. However belligerance will not highlight the wisdom of your evolutionary stance.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 728 by Nuggin, posted 07-08-2011 3:47 PM Nuggin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 752 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-09-2011 7:08 AM Mazzy has responded
 Message 757 by Nuggin, posted 07-09-2011 12:10 PM Mazzy has not yet responded
 Message 758 by Nuggin, posted 07-09-2011 12:17 PM Mazzy has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
4849
50
5152
...
72NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014